Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that results are a single page (pagination semantics) and names the underlying REST endpoint, but does not cover page sizing, ordering, or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short clauses; the core operation leads, the optionality constraint follows, and the REST mapping is a compact trailing reference. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple 2-param read tool with no output schema, the definition covers the operation, optionality, pagination, and endpoint. Minor gaps (what page of what size by default) keep it short of a 5.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so page and filter are already documented with examples. The description only restates that filters are optional, adding no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (list/search contacts) and clarifies the resource is customers. It implicitly distinguishes from reamaze_get_contact (single contact) and reamaze_create_contact, though it doesn't name siblings explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"All filters optional; returns a page of contacts" tells the agent invocation is safe with no arguments and that results are paginated. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use-vs-get_contact guidance or conditions for choosing search over list.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.